Anthony's Computer Forensics

[chicklet]

Interesting insights.

Are you a lawyer? I'm not, so all my opinions are lay and to be taking with a huge helping of salt.

But if you're a lawyer, I'd like to hear on what grounds Judge Perry's rulings have been clearly biased.

Nope, not a lawyer but I HAVE sat on a jury before. You all would hate my guts if I were on KC's jury because I would not convict her.

The judge should NEVER have let in that animation. Also, not allowing the defense to send a piece of that trunk liner to the touch DNA specialist to test was highly prejudicial. Not allowing Spitz to be present at the autopsy or giving the defense access to the site the remains were found, etc. All of this is very prejudicial.

 

[Chewy]

That is how I did it. I searched "Chloroform", not Chlorophyll. And if you do do it the other way, Chloroform doesn't come up until the 3rd choice, so there's no way it was auto-fill, or she accidentally clicked on it. She:liar:.

YOU SPELLED IT CORRECTLY. If you google CLOROF... that's how it comes up.

http://tinyurl.com/6jfgptj

Anyway this is a pointless bit of "evidence" since google searches are influenced by popular searches and since this case has taken off I bet chloroform has been googled to the max. So it's not the same now as it would have been back then.

Not only that but careless typing and not paying attention etc is very common when searching online. Half the time people right click and highlight when they want to search on google. You can't say for sure what happened, you weren't there and it's a completely different situation now.

 

[darnudes]

Nope, not a lawyer but I HAVE sat on a jury before. You all would hate my guts if I were on KC's jury because I would not convict her.

The judge should NEVER have let in that animation. Also, not allowing the defense to send a piece of that trunk liner to the touch DNA specialist to test was highly prejudicial. Not allowing Spitz to be present at the autopsy or giving the defense access to the site the remains were found, etc. All of this is very prejudicial.

This is all off topic, can we take it to appropriate threads please.

 

[Chewy]

just food for thought, the google autocomplete suggestions may not be the same now as they were in March of 08....

Ha! Great minds think alike!

 

[bdawk20]

Nope, not a lawyer but I HAVE sat on a jury before. You all would hate my guts if I were on KC's jury because I would not convict her.

The judge should NEVER have let in that animation. Also, not allowing the defense to send a piece of that trunk liner to the touch DNA specialist to test was highly prejudicial. Not allowing Spitz to be present at the autopsy or giving the defense access to the site the remains were found, etc. All of this is very prejudicial.

I'm sorry to have to chime in again, but I REALLY wish you would stop with the blanket statements. You are acting as if it is you against everyone else here. Just because some of our opinions differ from yours doesn't make it ok to keep lumping everyone that isn't you together. Again, I feel we are all entitled to our own opinions.




jmo

 

[ladylurker]

AHA!!!!!! i found the link i was looking for, plus some others. they are all from valhall's blog, which i find to be a great source with plenty of links to actual discovery/evidence to back it up, but i just want to remind anyone reading this post that is a blog and not a news website. however, here is the info that i remembered reading, with bold by me:

The first searches for chloroform, chloraform, alcohol, acetone and peroxide were conducted on March 17th from 1:43 pm to 1:55 pm. We can definitely rule Cindy out on these searches because, according to her time sheets, she was at work during this time.

and

The we come to March 21st. On this date, between 2:16 and 2:28 pm, some one on the Anthony desktop conducted searches for how to make chloroform, how to make chloraform, self defense, household weapons, neck breaking and shovel. They also visited the previously linked Google book on self defense for women. Cindy’s time sheets show she worked from 8:30 am to 6 pm on this date, and George’s time sheets show he worked from 7 am to 5 pm.

the quotes are from here. there is a link to the actual time sheets on this page.

find more information and thoughts here and here.

 

[Chewy]

I'm sorry to have to chime in again, but I REALLY wish you would stop with the blanket statements. You are acting as if it is you against everyone else here. Just because some of our opinions differ from yours doesn't make it ok to keep lumping everyone that isn't you together. Again, I feel we are all entitled to our own opinions.




jmo

I agree. I'm not a rabid Casey hater. But it's just really obvious to me that she killed her child. I think she probably did it by accident and tried to stage it to look like a kidnapping which is why I DO think that she put duct tape on her child after she was dead. I think she went out to party and just thought it would be ok to leave Caylee asleep in the car.

However, I also think she's a sociopath. Sociopath's can have accidents too. Not all sociopath's are murderers by design. Some successful people are sociopaths and are never criminal. But in this case to me she's a sociopath who killed her child. What got her to the accident was her blatant disregard for others.

So I do think she needs to get LWOP

 

[JWG]

i think post 531 in this thread, by JWG, is worth a re-read!!!! explains a lot about user accounts, who usually used what sites, other very interesting info and some interesting conclusions. now i have to find the post JWG posted on valhall's blog that is referenced here.

link

found it while digging around in search of info on chloroform searches and when they were done and who was home at the time... which i am still looking for. i am really bad at conducting searches, what can i say.

The interesting thing to take away from that post today is the following:

Now, what about the search for a flea remedy? :waitasec: Looking back at the IE history you will notice an absence of the use of Google to perform searches (prior to the evening of the 15th). It would seem George and Cindy were not hip to using Google. I therefore speculate that Casey is the one who searched for the flea remedy, and she did it on behalf of her mother. I’m pretty convinced that is the case, because from 8:33 AM to 8:40 AM on 3/8 we see Google searches from the Firefox browser, and then starting at 9:18 AM to 9:45 AM we see a whole slew of activity on IE from the “casey” account.

I believe there was not just a switch of browsers going on, but also a switch of user accounts.

So, I believe Casey was on the computer and Cindy asked her for some help looking for a flea solution, they did some searching together, and shortly after Casey finished, she logged off her “owner” account and Cindy hopped on the “casey” account and used the Yahoo and MSN search capabilities to continue looking for a flea remedy. After a while Caylee came by and she and Cindy looked at the cute pictures on http://www.babyanimalz.com.

The only searches on that computer concerning her pets in the spring of that year were done on Saturday, March 8, in the morning. They were first done from Firefox (probably while Casey was on the computer, hence the reason it was done from Firefox), and then later from Yahoo and MSN from Internet Explorer while logged into the non-password protected "casey" account. This is a week and a half before the chloroform searches.

 

[Turnadot]

Nope, not a lawyer but I HAVE sat on a jury before. You all would hate my guts if I were on KC's jury because I would not convict her.

The judge should NEVER have let in that animation. Also, not allowing the defense to send a piece of that trunk liner to the touch DNA specialist to test was highly prejudicial. Not allowing Spitz to be present at the autopsy or giving the defense access to the site the remains were found, etc. All of this is very prejudicial.

Well, as the the bold, that has nothing to do with Judge Perry. He wasn't the presiding judge then - Stan Strickland was. The child was unidentified at the time of the autopsy, and the crime scene was that of an unknown child. Of course Judge Strickland wasn't going to let Spitz or the defense team be present.

The animation was fine; it was a compilation of pictures that were already in evidence. AZlawyer addressed this in the Lawyer's thread.

None of what you cited is legally prejudicial.

 

[goldenlover]

YOU SPELLED IT CORRECTLY. If you google CLOROF... that's how it comes up.

http://tinyurl.com/6jfgptj

Anyway this is a pointless bit of "evidence" since google searches are influenced by popular searches and since this case has taken off I bet chloroform has been googled to the max. So it's not the same now as it would have been back then.

Not only that but careless typing and not paying attention etc is very common when searching online. Half the time people right click and highlight when they want to search on google. You can't say for sure what happened, you weren't there and it's a completely different situation now.

I can be on my computer talking to my sister on the telephone and she is on her computer and we both put the same word in the search and we both end up with different results.

 

[OH_Lyn]

With witness Sgt. Kevin Stenger on the stand today as a defense witness:

I think that the 84 visits to the Sci-spot.com site to learn how to make chloroform that's on the report made with the Cacheback software and the 84 visits to Myspace and 1 visit to Sci-spot.com from the Net Analysis sofware needs to be explained. Why don't those reports generated with 2 different software programs match?

LDB never did ask John Bradley who developed and wrote Cacheback when those 84 visits to the Sci-spot.com site that you can learn how to make chloroform occurred during direct examination when he was on the stand as a prosecution witness.

I agree ... 84 visits to both sites? Coincidence or software glitch? I bet the IT guy on the jury will be wondering the same thing.

 

[GeekyGirl]

It will not be unnoticed by the jury these search terms are not words an educated nurse would choose to use while searching. A nurse, imo, would have searched more scientific terms.


JMO

While there are plenty of really smart, wonderful nurses out there, an RN is, at minimum, a two year associates degree. I actually don't have a hard time seeing her searching without using scientific terms. That being said, I still think she's full of it. MOO

 

[goldenlover]

Because to most people who post here the testimony and evidence don't matter in this case unless it supports burning KC at the stake, at least that is my observation.

I agree. This trial is obviously not fair in any sense. The prosecution does not have enought concrete evidence and what they have seems to be on the verge of fabrication. Even the computer searchs. The number of times searched seems to match exactly to the day of the year...something wrong with how they are presenting that so-called evidence. The prosecution is playing dirty games with the "evidence".

 

[GeekyGirl]

The interesting thing to take away from that post today is the following:



The only searches on that computer concerning her pets in the spring of that year were done on Saturday, March 8, in the morning. They were first done from Firefox (probably while Casey was on the computer, hence the reason it was done from Firefox), and then later from Yahoo and MSN from Internet Explorer while logged into the non-password protected "casey" account. This is a week and a half before the chloroform searches.

Thank you for this... Your initial post on hinkymeter was extremely well thought out and informative, so I appreciate your insight.

 

[mydailyopinions]

Nope, not a lawyer but I HAVE sat on a jury before. You all would hate my guts if I were on KC's jury because I would not convict her.

The judge should NEVER have let in that animation. Also, not allowing the defense to send a piece of that trunk liner to the touch DNA specialist to test was highly prejudicial. Not allowing Spitz to be present at the autopsy or giving the defense access to the site the remains were found, etc. All of this is very prejudicial.

I don't understand how this could be prejudicial. The remains that were found on Dec 11 were not confirmed to be Caylee until days later. The defense team attempted to go to the site BEFORE the remains were identified.
If this is prejudicial, it must also be in some way admission of guilt of at least knowing where the remains of your "kidnapped" child were deposed of.

Secondly, why didn't the defense team use a portion of that $200,000 to send a piece of the trunk liner off? How is it prejudicial when Casey maintained that someone named Zanny kidnapped her child?

 

[mobius99]

I agree. This trial is obviously not fair in any sense. The prosecution does not have enought concrete evidence and what they have seems to be on the verge of fabrication. Even the computer searchs. The number of times searched seems to match exactly to the day of the year...something wrong with how they are presenting that so-called evidence. The prosecution is playing dirty games with the "evidence".

LOL. Conspiracy much?

 

[Jstc4caylee]

Oh, yeah..Cindy came home early on her Anniversary, and Casey's birthday, and what did she do? Search Chloroform...
I have to quit watching this stuff, my heart hearts so bad.

I am not pushing the for the death penalty (pushing, hoping) I would prefer she sit there and be miserable with herself.

 

[coloradoteacher]

So as to the testimony today regarding myspace having an 84 next to as well and Richard Hornsby's tweet that it could have to do with how many days have passed in the year, I googled 84th day of the year and found that it should be March 25, not the 21st or 17th.

 

[Chilly Willy]

So as to the testimony today regarding myspace having an 84 next to as well and Richard Hornsby's tweet that it could have to do with how many days have passed in the year, I googled 84th day of the year and found that it should be March 25, not the 21st or 17th.

None the less, the myspace and chloroform searches were labeled with the numbers 81 through 84 chronologically by date and time. I don't know what the '80' numbers represented, but it was not the number of visits to a particular site. That's a huge thing for the DA to get wrong, IMO. It creates the appearance that they are creating or enhancing the evidence against Casey.

 

[goldenlover]

LOL. Conspiracy much?

I don't think it's a "conspiracy". I just think they are taking the evidence that they have and presenting it to the jury in a way that alters what it really means. Why does the number of myspace searchs seem to correspond with the chloroform search? The computer must have been auto-refreshing, but they will not let that little tidbit of information out for the jury to hear.